Evidence Hub

The Efficacy of Pharmacological Interventions in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (WHO Group 1): A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

D. H, David Kevin Graham Lesnussa

International journal of medical science and health research, 2025

Abstract

Introduction: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), WHO Group 1, is a progressive vasculopathy leading to right heart failure and premature death. Pharmacological therapies targeting the endothelin, nitric oxide, and prostacyclin pathways have improved outcomes, but the optimal treatment strategy remains a subject of ongoing investigation. This systematic review synthesizes evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of these interventions, with a focus on the comparative benefits of monotherapy versus combination therapy.

Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted for RCTs published from January 1990 to the present. Studies enrolling adult patients with WHO Group 1 PAH and evaluating approved pharmacological agents against placebo or another active therapy were included. Data on study design, patient characteristics, and a minimum of 15 predefined outcomes—including functional, hemodynamic, biomarker, and clinical event endpoints—were extracted. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. A narrative synthesis was performed.

Results: Seventeen pivotal RCTs were included in the final analysis. Monotherapy with endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs), nitric oxide pathway modulators (phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators), and prostacyclin pathway agents demonstrated significant…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free